So, I've noticed a phenomenon among some people in some countries. Namely, that certain people hate their own country or else don't support doing what's in their country's best interest. I notice it a lot here in the United States.
Now, I understand, from a domestic and from a foreign perpsective, that citizens of a country will find problems that should be solved. However, what I do not understand is why citizens of a country should denigrate their own country, or want their country to be subservient to another. That doesn't make sense to me. It's not so much a question of national pride, but more of an issue with national benefit. Why wouldn't you want your country to be #1? Why wouldn't you want your country to look after it's own national security?
Depends if you are talking truth, real life or the internet.
People tend to grouse verbally, it is a way of letting off steam. Its how they act, though, that is really important. A lot of people may complain, but.. when push comes to shove, get in and do what needs doing.
Yeah, internet grousing aside though... I read in another thread where someone said the US has the biggest navy in the world and then another person, presumably a US citizen, said (and I'm paraphrasing), "so they can make everyone think like we do." Don't you want people to buy Happy Meals and Coke? Doesn't that help the US (and by extension), you? Yes and yes. It is in our own self-interest for us to be the most powerful country.
As for myself, of course I want us to be number one. Of course I want the rest of the world to enjoy the products we make and export.
I don't want us to get too big for our britches, or be the World Police. The UN is supposed to have a larger role in that, and the Bush doctrine made great strides to diminishing our capacity to defend our nation. 9/11 probably never would have happened if there was thorough screening for anything that could be used as a weapon, especially something as vicious as box cutter.
We didn't need to pick a huge, costly fight with Iraq to bolster our security.
Last edited by pimpdave on Tue May 18, 2010 7:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
What if (you think) the government in your country is horrible?
Why then would you want to have anything benefit it or increase its power? Wouldn't you rather want what is worst for it and to keep is subservient under other nations who (you think) have good governments?
thegreekdog wrote:Yeah, internet grousing aside though... I read in another thread where someone said the US has the biggest navy in the world and then another person, presumably a US citizen, said (and I'm paraphrasing), "so they can make everyone think like we do." Don't you want people to buy Happy Meals and Coke? Doesn't that help the US (and by extension), you? Yes and yes. It is in our own self-interest for us to be the most powerful country.
Not necessarily. To begin, there is a HUGE difference between supporting any company, U.S. owned or not and supporting the U.S. Many, many U.S. companies do us great harm. Buying Happy Meals and Coke will make stockholders of McDonalds and Coke happy, but not necessarily anyone else. If those companies are doing things that are truly harmful to the rest of us, whether because they are selling products detrimental to our health (which they are doing), employing people in ways that mean they are a drain and not a benefit to society, or polluting. (NOT saying these companies do all these things, though there are accusations) In fact, it will be an extremely superficial and very short-sighted benefit. It will ultimately harm the rest of us far more than help.
BP, even though it is a British company, is an example. Though they are not truly a US company, they are very much a part of the economic system that the US supports. Yet, they have caused us incredible and irreperable harm that will never be repaid. The companies that created each and every superfund sight caused damage that will never truly be repaid, etc.
Your comment about the military is more pertinent, perhaps. The military is an integral part of us. However, again, many people would say our heavy emphasis on the military (not agreeing, just saying..) is part of why our economy, etc are doing so poorly. I think we have all heard the saw that if 1/10 of what is spent on the military went to social services, we would all be living pretty high.
So, basically, a lot of what seems to be general grousing is really specific.
Then you get to the bigger issues. If what the US is doing right now is truly and honestly terrible for everyone (I DO NOT think this!), then it would make sense to look elsewhere, try to support those who were doing what you wanted. I believe a lot of religious people do that.
The Neon Peon wrote:What if (you think) the government in your country is horrible?
Why then would you want to have anything benefit it or increase its power? Wouldn't you rather want what is worst for it and to keep is subservient under other nations who (you think) have good governments?
Is it the party in power you hate or is it the system of government you have...or both?
The Neon Peon wrote:What if (you think) the government in your country is horrible?
Why then would you want to have anything benefit it or increase its power? Wouldn't you rather want what is worst for it and to keep is subservient under other nations who (you think) have good governments?
This is a good point and one I didn't think of (probably because I was viewing this from a US perspective... perpetuating the stereotypes).
As for myself, of course I want us to be number one. Of course I want the rest of the world to enjoy the products we make and export.
I don't want us to get too big for our britches, or be the World Police. The UN is supposed to have a larger role in that, and the Bush doctrine made great strides to diminishing our capacity to defend our nation. 9/11 probably never would have happened if there was thorough screening for anything that could be used as a weapon, especially something as vicious as box cutter.
We didn't need to pick a huge, costly fight with Iraq to bolster our security.
I agree with everything here, except I may have misunderstood something. Are you contending that 9/11 happened because of the Bush doctrine (I don't think that's what you're saying, but I wanted to make sure).
Criticism of the US government and US companies should not be confused. However, it is currently very hard to distinguish the two because they are so tightly tied together. That, in itself is a problem.
We want corporations tied to our government to a point, else they will actively work to destroy it. Even if that is not their overt intention, it will be the result.. companies operate for profit above all else, with only very, very few exceptions. It is sort of like talking about attorneys. An attorney's JOB is to do his best to free his/her client (get the best terms), even if that client is the most henious person on Earth. There are very few limits to that caveat. (yes, lawyers do have morals, but our system requires that they put aside personal feelings except in the utmost extreme cases). So, too, is a company's (well, its managament) JOB to make a profit .. nowadays, to make a profit for stockholders and not necessarily the company itself (another issue). This is not an "aside" to our system, it is an integral part of it.
However, it is the government's JOB to control and limit the operations of companies and individuals when they harm the rest of us. When corporations are too tight with the government, then that check fails.
Beyond this, the checks within our government have quickly begun to fail. Bush, etc. loaded the Supreme court with people who are intent on pushing forward their very pro-business agenda. (note that all the hoopla over abortion was just that.. diversionary hoopla, it was never really and truly "the" issue, just a convenient stump upon which the public fight could be wages, so the real deals could pass behind closed doors). He intensified his power in the executive branch more than anyone since Reagan. Meanwhle, congress has become and institution of bullies, where instead of debate and compromise, we have a bunch of people standing on "principle" so much publically, that people completely miss real and true legislation that gets passed to our detriment.
This who "net nuetrality" issue is just one example. We have seen almost no press on it, yet unless net nuetrality is truly maintained, we all will lose. Just look at the power facebook, google, etc all have now. YET, Google is not truly nuetral. Try to find information on particular subjects and it can be very, very difficult. This is not just because the information is obscure, it also has to do with how they format their searches. Now, far be from me to say that this is a nefarious plot on their part to limit certain information. I actually don't believe that is the case. Ibeliev, instead, that they are operating and effective business model. They are willing to forgo certain absolute accuracy points in favor of business. After all, they have to make a buck, AND, the truth is few people will even notice. What most people want is just controversy, hype, etc. Most people are not interesting in real and true critical science, except where it is controversial.
So, the result is that google is a quick way to find out what other people have read, decided is important, but is not necessarily the most objective way to really and truly learn about something. This type of bias has always existed, but I don't really think most people are truly aware of how profound this impact is now. Everything that was a problem before is not intensified to an extreme.
Anyway, that brings up my final point. Because so much on the internet is geared toward "hyping" controversy, just by its very nature right now, complaints and "issues" tend to be much more prominant, much more noticeable. Because we all surf the net, it impacts our everyday thinking.
In other words, the internet tendency to hype controversy, to look only at surfaces and not in-depth, these things are permeating our daily lives, our daily speech. Also, the percieved ephemeral nature of the internet means people are far more likely to just poke criticism and forget about it.... except, in truth it is not forgotten. Every complaint, every bitter remark, actually gets perpetuated and perpetuated far more quickly than anything positive. So, we live in an age when it seems that everyone is critical of things, even when they really and truly are not.... BUT, that perception then winds up making people more critical.
It is an endless cycle that winds up with people expressing a LOT of dissatisfaction, against most everything.
thegreekdog wrote:So, I've noticed a phenomenon among some people in some countries. Namely, that certain people hate their own country or else don't support doing what's in their country's best interest. I notice it a lot here in the United States.
Now, I understand, from a domestic and from a foreign perpsective, that citizens of a country will find problems that should be solved. However, what I do not understand is why citizens of a country should denigrate their own country, or want their country to be subservient to another. That doesn't make sense to me. It's not so much a question of national pride, but more of an issue with national benefit. Why wouldn't you want your country to be #1? Why wouldn't you want your country to look after it's own national security?
Anyway, I thought I'd get your thoughts.
I absolutely want our nation to be #1. Though getting there in a way I agree with, of course.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
I guess it depends on what ones priorities are and how a country is measured, in economic and military terms then the USA is clearly number one but in social indexes it lags behind a number of other countries. Public healthcare in the USA is a very good example of this, bitterly opposed by many and very possibly a drain on the economy yet likely to push you up the overall ratings. In general terms I think there is probably a balance of opinion in democratic nations, the whiners tending to counter the overly patriotic .If for example you have a section of the US populace who can see absolutely nothing wrong with anything the military do then it is natural that those who oppose such a view will be vocal in condemnation.
thegreekdog wrote:I agree with everything here, except I may have misunderstood something. Are you contending that 9/11 happened because of the Bush doctrine (I don't think that's what you're saying, but I wanted to make sure).
I'm saying the Bush Doctrine came about as a result of 9/11, when we don't need the Bush Doctrine to keep weapons off of planes.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
thegreekdog wrote:I agree with everything here, except I may have misunderstood something. Are you contending that 9/11 happened because of the Bush doctrine (I don't think that's what you're saying, but I wanted to make sure).
I'm saying the Bush Doctrine came about as a result of 9/11, when we don't need the Bush Doctrine to keep weapons off of planes.
thegreekdog wrote:I read in another thread where someone said the US has the biggest navy in the world and then another person, presumably a US citizen, said (and I'm paraphrasing), "so they can make everyone think like we do."
I didn't say that. And that was me who said it. We don't have the largest Military/Navy in the world to keep everyone safe. We have it to subjugate them. Even countries where we have long-standing bases and seemingly friendly relationships, we actually just tell them what to do. Do you know what a SOFA agreement is? It's a license to rape their citizens with no consequences (literally), often while the host nation pays us to keep our base there. And this is often against the will of the locals (Japan is an excellent example of this). As an American I am not happy about this, and the ones who are piss me off. We may be the number one nation in the world from an economic/military perspective, but we're anything but the good guys.
Anyway, whatever. Being a Patriot means supporting your country. Your people. But it does not mean supporting your government.
thegreekdog wrote:I read in another thread where someone said the US has the biggest navy in the world and then another person, presumably a US citizen, said (and I'm paraphrasing), "so they can make everyone think like we do."
I didn't say that. And that was me who said it.
Uh....<cheesy grin>
Juan_Bottom wrote:We don't have the largest Military/Navy in the world to keep everyone safe. We have it to subjugate them. Even countries where we have long-standing bases and seemingly friendly relationships, we actually just tell them what to do.
If that were the case, Germany would be knee-deep in Iraq and Afghanstan too. Clearly, that is not the case.
Juan_Bottom wrote:Do you know what a SOFA agreement is? It's a license to rape their citizens with no consequences (literally)
Oh my GOD, man...please do not continue to display your ignorance in this fashion.
Juan_Bottom wrote:Anyway, whatever. Being a Patriot means supporting your country. Your people. But it does not mean supporting your government.
Sometimes, being a patriot means NOT supporting your government, in my opinion...or certainly at least, certain actions by your government.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
thegreekdog wrote:I read in another thread where someone said the US has the biggest navy in the world and then another person, presumably a US citizen, said (and I'm paraphrasing), "so they can make everyone think like we do."
I didn't say that. And that was me who said it. We don't have the largest Military/Navy in the world to keep everyone safe. We have it to subjugate them. Even countries where we have long-standing bases and seemingly friendly relationships, we actually just tell them what to do. Do you know what a SOFA agreement is? It's a license to rape their citizens with no consequences (literally), often while the host nation pays us to keep our base there. And this is often against the will of the locals (Japan is an excellent example of this). As an American I am not happy about this, and the ones who are piss me off. We may be the number one nation in the world from an economic/military perspective, but we're anything but the good guys.
Anyway, whatever. Being a Patriot means supporting your country. Your people. But it does not mean supporting your government.
Okay, let's assume all that is true (apart from the "hey, let's go rape some Japanese"). How does subjugation affect you negatively? Doesn't the US being the bad guy affect you in a positive fashion? Weren't the Joker's cronies positively affected when he robbed a bank?
The answer is no. Such things always come back to bite us. Maybe not immediately, but they do.
Yeah, morals would be the thing I guess. I should lock this thread now. Dammit... I hate it when a plan doesn't come together.
You actually had a good point. Its just that there were a lot of explanations. Maybe if you narrowed the topic? From my standpoint, you made a mistake in trying to tie business and the government together.
I know one thing that really bothered me, it was young college students that were happy to live in this country (never knew any other), revelled in our freedom, took government assistance, but who refused to sign documents that they would support our constitution.
This is slightly off topic, but one of my major regrets in life was not joining the military. I was recruited at West Point, but my mother would not let me apply. I guess it all worked out for the best, but I feel like I should have served.
Now I actually have almost the opposite tale. I very much looked into joining the Coast Gaurd. About the time I was ready to sign, my grandmother told me she would disown me. Later.. well, let's just say she was in the military prior to tailhook. And, I would have been, too.
I am glad I did not join, but I respect those who do.
thegreekdog wrote:This is slightly off topic, but one of my major regrets in life was not joining the military. I was recruited at West Point, but my mother would not let me apply. I guess it all worked out for the best, but I feel like I should have served.
The biggest regret of my life is that i joined the military. I would feel a lot better about myself if i'd been one of those who went to Canada.
thegreekdog wrote:This is slightly off topic, but one of my major regrets in life was not joining the military. I was recruited at West Point, but my mother would not let me apply. I guess it all worked out for the best, but I feel like I should have served.
It's not too late.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
thegreekdog wrote:This is slightly off topic, but one of my major regrets in life was not joining the military. I was recruited at West Point, but my mother would not let me apply. I guess it all worked out for the best, but I feel like I should have served.
It's not too late.
In theory it's not too late, in reality it is. I have a wife (who won't be supportive) and school loans.
